Judicial Authority of Italy v Bitraj

On an appeal against conditional bail in extradition proceedings, the High Court conducts a rehearing, rather than a review of the lower court’s decision. In deciding whether to grant bail, the court must assess the practical risk of absconding, including the seriousness and duration of the alleged outstanding sentence, the nature and breadth of the offences, the strength and recency of the person’s domestic ties, who would bear any financial loss, and access to alternative travel documents. Substantial security and surrender of a passport may carry limited weight where others would bear the financial burden or forged documents are readily available.

The Judicial Authority of Italy appealed under section 11A of the Bail Amendment Act 1993 against District Judge Rose’s decision to grant conditional bail to Mr Bitraj. He was wanted under three European Arrest Warrants to continue serving sentences said to total more than five years and seven months for serious offences including robbery, drug possession, firearms offences and forgery.

The bail conditions included £30,000 security, residence and reporting requirements, surrender of his Albanian passport, and a prohibition on entering ports or international airports. The central issue was whether those conditions sufficiently reduced the risk that Mr Bitraj would abscond before the extradition proceedings were completed.

1. Appeal allowed. The decision to grant conditional bail was set aside, bail was refused, and Mr Bitraj was to remain in custody.
2. The appeal under section 11A of the Bail Amendment Act 1993 was a rehearing, not a review of District Judge Rose’s decision. The court therefore had power under section 1(9) of the Act to remand Mr Bitraj in custody.
3. In assessing the risk of absconding, the court considered the proposed security, the respondent’s connections with the United Kingdom, the seriousness and range of the offences, the length of imprisonment said to remain outstanding, and the respondent’s ability to obtain travel documents.
4. The £30,000 security was given limited weight because it came almost entirely from the respondent’s friends and fiancée. If he absconded, they, rather than he, would bear the burden of confiscation. His United Kingdom ties, although described as strong, were also recent and insufficiently close to provide adequate reassurance.
5. The offences were exceptionally serious and involved violence, robbery, substantial drug possession, a loaded handgun and forgery. The outstanding imprisonment was measured in years rather than months. Those matters created a considerable temptation to abscond.
6. The respondent’s English convictions for possessing forged Italian identity and travel documents showed that surrender of his Albanian passport would not prevent him obtaining alternative documents to facilitate travel and absconding. The bail conditions were therefore insufficient.

• High Court (Administrative Court): On the rehearing, the appeal against the conditional-bail decision was allowed and Mr Bitraj was denied bail.
• District Judge Rose: Conditional bail was granted on 21 December 2016, subject principally to £30,000 security, residence and reporting conditions, passport restrictions and a prohibition on entering ports or international airports.